2030 no new diesel vans. What's your plan?

[SpeedyDux]

Thats interesting however:

"Ultimately, hydrogen is no more or less dangerous than other flammable fuels including natural gas and gasoline. In some cases, what makes hydrogen different from those hydrocarbon fuels actually leads to it having greater safety benefits over gasoline and natural gas."

Green hydrogen benefits aside, one of the common myths that lead to some questioning H2 safety is the notorious Hindenburg disaster, which occurred in New Jersey, back in 1937.

After decades long debate and research, it is now believed that while the German passenger airship was docking during an electrical storm on the fateful day of the explosion, an electrical discharge from the clouds ignited the skin of the airship. This resulted in the ship’s hydrogen bags igniting.

However, what caused the large and deadly fire was not the hydrogen, which burned rapidly and safely above the ship’s occupants, but the dark iron oxide and reflective aluminum paint that coated the ship’s surface. Those components were highly flammable and burned at a high energetic rate once they caught fire.

I thought this Video was interesting partially the comment about "inside the rear window the temperature rose only 13 degrees"

I knew about the Hindenberg stuff. I don't suppose the passengers and crew cared about the precise cause. I am less concerned about the relative flammability of hydrogen. The key problem is ensuring that hydrogen doesn't leak.

Imagine filling your hydrogen car (or MH); then, when you want to drive it next morning, discovering that the tank is empty. Next, imagine that happening with your domestic boiler. Tricky wee molecules versus mediocre engineering.

 

[Coolcats]

I knew about the Hindenberg stuff. I don't suppose the passengers and crew cared about the precise cause. I am less concerned about the relative flammability of hydrogen. The key problem is ensuring that hydrogen doesn't leak.

Imagine filling your hydrogen car (or MH); then, when you want to drive it next morning, discovering that the tank is empty. Next, imagine that happening with your domestic boiler. Tricky wee molecules versus mediocre engineering.

Totally understand the concern one can only hope the fitting is secure.

I was once called by security to go and sort my car out somehow I had a fuel leak on a joint in the fuel tank, security somehow had found some sand and sand bags surrounding the car. Fortunately the tank did not have a huge amount of fuel I. Ans most has already drained the AA took the car home, I purchased some petrol putty and push this in to the hole and it stopped the tank leaking again and got another 5 years out of the car.

 

[Gromett]

Any way of having choice re ones fuel source must be good for competition. Having only one whatever that one maybe is not good at all . Surely if we ended up with only one option (it’s looking like electric) the monopolies commission would have something to say about it.
Otherwise we’ll be held to ransom re price. They could literally charge whatever they wish and it’s pay or don’t cook, heat your home, drive your car etc.

Erm... Green Hydrogen comes from electric. If the electric goes out so does the hydrogen production.

 

[Gromett]

"Jon Gluyas, Ørsted/Ikon chair in geoenergy, carbon capture and storage at Durham University, adds that the real question is whether it is cost-effective to set up such equipment at scale. Proponents, unsurprisingly, argue it is - but with energy systems the proof is only ever in the pudding. Ultimately, Prof Gluyas says a mix of different technologies and approaches will be needed for countries like the UK to be carbon neutral."

You see Grommet, there are multiple perspectives, Flow Batteries just like Hydrogen have a place

He is a into carbon storage which indicates he wants to produce hydrogen from natural gas and store the CO2. Not a long term solution in my view.

But I agree with him on this statement. A mix of of technologies is required. That is why I support offshore wind, tidal energy, lithium batteries, SMR Nuclear, compressed air storage, flow batteries and hydrogen. BUT I support each technology for where it is going to be most effective.

I don't think flow batteries are suitable for short term storage and lithium is not suitable for long term storage. Compressed air is best for long term bulk storage. Green hydrogen is not suitable for cars etc but is great for steel, cement, bulk long distance shipping etc.

 

[Coolcats]

Erm... Green Hydrogen comes from electric. If the electric goes out so does the hydrogen production.

Yup indeed no one said any different, what is bing talked about is a Choice of energy supplied and used.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Coolcats]

He is a into carbon storage which indicates he wants to produce hydrogen from natural gas and store the CO2. Not a long term solution in my view.

But I agree with him on this statement. A mix of of technologies is required. That is why I support offshore wind, tidal energy, lithium batteries, SMR Nuclear, compressed air storage, flow batteries and hydrogen. BUT I support each technology for where it is going to be most effective.

I don't think flow batteries are suitable for short term storage and lithium is not suitable for long term storage. Compressed air is best for long term bulk storage. Green hydrogen is not suitable for cars etc but is great for steel, cement, bulk long distance shipping etc.

Good to see your supporting an energy mix as I do beleive most if not all on this forum are in agreement with, the concern is the weight of Batteries that will eat in to the payload of MoHo's plus the charging regimes and distance of the current vehicles and s where Hydrogen can possibly provide an answer. With the Gas companies looking at solutions for a National supply to Homes and businesses. Long term this could also help overcome the distribution of Hydrogen to service stations or it may be that Service stations could gererate thier own , which would mean Hydrogen Powered MoHo's that do not have the Battery weight penalties.

 

[glenn2926]

Erm... Green Hydrogen comes from electric. If the electric goes out so does the hydrogen production.

There’s no if about it? If we, the end user refuse to pay whatever the suppliers want for electric they will stop supplying it. That could be less than we pay now but they’re not in it for fun or for the good of the end user. They’re in it to make money and when we have no other fuel type to access the electric suppliers can and will charge whatever they want.

 

[Gromett]

the concern is the weight of Batteries that will eat in to the payload of MoHo's plus the charging regimes

Current Lithium batteries give you around 250Wh/KG for NMC. The theoretical maximum for Lithium chemistries is 11.6 KWh/KG which is actually higher than petrol. However this doesn't include the other materials required to build a battery.
Here is one thing to consider though, historically Lithium battery energy density has doubled every 7 years, but in recent years this rate of increase is itself rising. We can expect to see this rate of increase accelerate as massive funds are now being invested in Li batteries due to EV and grid scale storage demand.

In 5 years we will no doubt see solid state lithium batteries hit the market which will more than double the energy density of current commonly used battery tech in EV's.

By the time the ban comes expect to see 600WH/KG... Remember that 11.6KWh/KG figure I mentioned above. That is the theoretical maximum. 600Wh/KG is only 5% of the theoretical maximum. Let's say we can get to 20% of the theoretical maximum which is me being harsh on the tech. At 20% that is 2,300Wh/KG. You would need 43KG to give you a 100KWh battery in your van or less than 100KG for a 200KWh battery.

As for payload. Remember you are losing the gearbox, engine and all it's very heavy ancillaries like emission control equipment, exhaust etc etc and a very heavy fuel tank when full. Your leisure battery wouldn't be needed any more and you would likely lose your LPG bottles/tanks and go fully electric for heating and cooking. Integrated heat management systems would come into their own in future motorhomes. Whilst you are driving the excess heat from the motor and batteries could be redirect to heat your water tank rather than going to the radiator at the front to be cooled.
That is just one of many examples I could give. The future of motorhomes is a long way off. I foresee diesel motorhomes still being in use 15-20 years in the future easily with many being used well into the 2040's. There is no rush and by then the battery technology will have moved on a LOT. Still no national hydrogen pump network though due to lack of demand.

 

[Coolcats]

Current Lithium batteries give you around 250Wh/KG for NMC. The theoretical maximum for Lithium chemistries is 11.6 KWh/KG which is actually higher than petrol. However this doesn't include the other materials required to build a battery.
Here is one thing to consider though, historically Lithium battery energy density has doubled every 7 years, but in recent years this rate of increase is itself rising. We can expect to see this rate of increase accelerate as massive funds are now being invested in Li batteries due to EV and grid scale storage demand.

In 5 years we will no doubt see solid state lithium batteries hit the market which will more than double the energy density of current commonly used battery tech in EV's.

By the time the ban comes expect to see 600WH/KG... Remember that 11.6KWh/KG figure I mentioned above. That is the theoretical maximum. 600Wh/KG is only 5% of the theoretical maximum. Let's say we can get to 20% of the theoretical maximum which is me being harsh on the tech. At 20% that is 2,300Wh/KG. You would need 43KG to give you a 100KWh battery in your van or less than 100KG for a 200KWh battery.

As for payload. Remember you are losing the gearbox, engine and all it's very heavy ancillaries like emission control equipment, exhaust etc etc and a very heavy fuel tank when full. Your leisure battery wouldn't be needed any more and you would likely lose your LPG bottles/tanks and go fully electric for heating and cooking. Integrated heat management systems would come into their own in future motorhomes. Whilst you are driving the excess heat from the motor and batteries could be redirect to heat your water tank rather than going to the radiator at the front to be cooled.
That is just one of many examples I could give. The future of motorhomes is a long way off. I foresee diesel motorhomes still being in use 15-20 years in the future easily with many being used well into the 2040's. There is no rush and by then the battery technology will have moved on a LOT. Still no national hydrogen pump network though due to lack of demand.

Just imagine how much more payload you would have with Hydrogen

 

[SpeedyDux]

Current Lithium batteries give you around 250Wh/KG for NMC. The theoretical maximum for Lithium chemistries is 11.6 KWh/KG which is actually higher than petrol. However this doesn't include the other materials required to build a battery.
Here is one thing to consider though, historically Lithium battery energy density has doubled every 7 years, but in recent years this rate of increase is itself rising. We can expect to see this rate of increase accelerate as massive funds are now being invested in Li batteries due to EV and grid scale storage demand.

In 5 years we will no doubt see solid state lithium batteries hit the market which will more than double the energy density of current commonly used battery tech in EV's.

By the time the ban comes expect to see 600WH/KG... Remember that 11.6KWh/KG figure I mentioned above. That is the theoretical maximum. 600Wh/KG is only 5% of the theoretical maximum. Let's say we can get to 20% of the theoretical maximum which is me being harsh on the tech. At 20% that is 2,300Wh/KG. You would need 43KG to give you a 100KWh battery in your van or less than 100KG for a 200KWh battery.

As for payload. Remember you are losing the gearbox, engine and all it's very heavy ancillaries like emission control equipment, exhaust etc etc and a very heavy fuel tank when full. Your leisure battery wouldn't be needed any more and you would likely lose your LPG bottles/tanks and go fully electric for heating and cooking. Integrated heat management systems would come into their own in future motorhomes. Whilst you are driving the excess heat from the motor and batteries could be redirect to heat your water tank rather than going to the radiator at the front to be cooled.
That is just one of many examples I could give. The future of motorhomes is a long way off. I foresee diesel motorhomes still being in use 15-20 years in the future easily with many being used well into the 2040's. There is no rush and by then the battery technology will have moved on a LOT. Still no national hydrogen pump network though due to lack of demand.

I get that there is scope for higher energy density so battery technology will get better in that respect.

At what point does the rate of energy transfer during charging start to hit its limit?

This question is as much about the practical limit as the theoretical limit.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Gromett]

Just imagine how much more payload you would have with Hydrogen

Do you know how much a hydrogen fuel cell weighs or the hydrogen tank and associated equipment? Remember a Fuel Cell still requires a battery and charging equipment.

I will answer this for the Toyota Mirai. The Fuel cell stack weight is 56 kg, while the hydrogen tank's weight is 87.5 kg.

The weight argument for Fuel Cells is a wash. Literally the ONLY benefit of hydrogen (currently) is the speed of refilling.

It is Interesting that the curb weight of Mirai is 1,850 kg, which means that fuel cells don't have a weight advantage over EVs. Nissan, for example, could add much more battery capacity to it's LEAF and still stay within the same weight and price tag of Mirai.

 

[Gromett]

I get that there is scope for higher energy density so battery technology will get better in that respect.

At what point does the rate of energy transfer during charging start to hit its limit?

This question is as much about the practical limit as the theoretical limit.

Interesting question. I think what we need to discuss is not just the charge speed but the efficiency of the vehicle. At the bottom end there are vehicles that have 2.x miles per KWh going up to 6 miles per KWh at the top end. Let's do the maths for 2 efficiencies and 2 charge rates.
Let's use 3 miles per KWh and 5 miles per KWh for the efficiency. And use 50KW charger and a 100KW charger.

At 3 miles/KWh on a 50KW charger you get 150 miles per hour charge rate. or 2.5 miles per minute charge rate.
At 3 miles/KWh on a 100KW charger you get 300 miles per hour charge rate. or 5 miles per minute charge rate.
At 6 miles/KWh on a 50KW charger you get 300 miles per hour charge rate. or 5 miles per minute charge rate.
At 6 miles/KWh on a 100KW charger you get 600 miles per hour charge rate. or 10 miles per minute charge rate.

So as you can see it is not just how fast you can get charge into a car it is how efficient that car can use it. Suprisingly the Porsche Taycan shouted out about it's fast charge rate, but then blew it on the efficiency meaning that the Tesla won in long distance races because it went much much further on each charge.

There is a practical limit to charger rates, but this is probably not due to the batteries but due to the infrastructure demands. And to be honest if you have a car capable of doing 300 miles on a charge and does 6 miles to the KWh then it has a battery of 50KWh. If you want to charge in 10 minutes that requires a 300KW charger. That is well within today's battery and charger tech capabilities. I suspect however that we will move to dual voltage charging systems with normal cars staying at around the 400V mark and a 20 minute charge time. With only the long range models moving to the 800V architecture to speed up charging.

 

[Coolcats]

Do you know how much a hydrogen fuel cell weighs or the hydrogen tank and associated equipment? Remember a Fuel Cell still requires a battery and charging equipment.

I will answer this for the Toyota Mirai. The Fuel cell stack weight is 56 kg, while the hydrogen tank's weight is 87.5 kg.

The weight argument for Fuel Cells is a wash. Literally the ONLY benefit of hydrogen (currently) is the speed of refilling.

It is Interesting that the curb weight of Mirai is 1,850 kg, which means that fuel cells don't have a weight advantage over EVs. Nissan, for example, could add much more battery capacity to it's LEAF and still stay within the same weight and price tag of Mirai.

For every objection there is always an answer Grommet,

<Broken link removed>

<Broken link removed>

Everfuel examples in Holland (Bus) and Copenhagen (Taxi)

<Broken link removed> <Broken link removed>

If t was all such a waste of time no company in thier right mind would go down this road but clearly they are....so watch this space Hydrogen will be part of our energy mix

​

 

[glenn2926]

For every objection there is always an answer Grommet,

<Broken link removed>

<Broken link removed>

Everfuel examples in Holland (Bus) and Copenhagen (Taxi)

<Broken link removed> <Broken link removed>

If t was all such a waste of time no company in thier right mind would go down this road but clearly they are....so watch this space Hydrogen will be part of our energy mix

​

Great, the more fuel options there are the more competitive the supplier will need to be to attract customers.

 

[Gromett]

For every objection there is always an answer Grommet,

<Broken link removed>

<Broken link removed>

Everfuel examples in Holland (Bus) and Copenhagen (Taxi)

<Broken link removed> <Broken link removed>

If t was all such a waste of time no company in thier right mind would go down this road but clearly they are....so watch this space Hydrogen will be part of our energy mix

​

You keep giving foreign development when I have consistently said that I am talking about the UK.

Green Hydrogen will work in Australia for instance because they have lots of very cheap land with massive amounts of sunshine for solar. This makes electricity very cheap (wholesale).
Green Hydrogen will work in a lot of the USA for the same reason, Arizona, Nevada, Texas, Florida etc etc have huge amounts of Sun and can't produce excess for cheap.
Ditto for Africa, India and probably much of southern Europe. Norway due to it's hydro electric could probably manage as well.
Green Hydrogen won't work here because we are electric constrained, don't have cheap land, and don't have excess sun for solar.

Until we have grid scale storage that matches daily peaks for peak shaving we need gas peaker plants and as long as we have those hydrogen will not be practical.

We need to
1) Develop enough grid scale storage so that daily production from renewables matches daily requirements with enough excess capacity to cover down days.
2) Develop local storage systems to buffer the grid so transmission can handle the conversion of homes to electric heating and cooking.
3) Utilise excess electric that can't be stored to provide Green hydrogen for things like Steel, shipping, cement and other use cases where hydrogen is the best option.

In this country only once this is done can we consider wasting electric on electrolysing water for green hydrogen. We have too many other uses for the electric and the hydrogen where both are more suitable.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Coolcats]

You keep giving foreign development when I have consistently said that I am talking about the UK.

Green Hydrogen will work in Australia for instance because they have lots of very cheap land with massive amounts of sunshine for solar. This makes electricity very cheap (wholesale).
Green Hydrogen will work in a lot of the USA for the same reason, Arizona, Nevada, Texas, Florida etc etc have huge amounts of Sun and can't produce excess for cheap.
Ditto for Africa, India and probably much of southern Europe. Norway due to it's hydro electric could probably manage as well.
Green Hydrogen won't work here because we are electric constrained, don't have cheap land, and don't have excess sun for solar.

Until we have grid scale storage that matches daily peaks for peak shaving we need gas peaker plants and as long as we have those hydrogen will not be practical.

We need to
1) Develop enough grid scale storage so that daily production from renewables matches daily requirements with enough excess capacity to cover down days.
2) Develop local storage systems to buffer the grid so transmission can handle the conversion of homes to electric heating and cooking.
3) Utilise excess electric that can't be stored to provide Green hydrogen for things like Steel, shipping, cement and other use cases where hydrogen is the best option.

In this country only once this is done can we consider wasting electric on electrolysing water for green hydrogen. We have too many other uses for the electric and the hydrogen where both are more suitable.

We may not have as much sunshine as some countries but we do have wind and wave power, so its not really an excuse to br behind the curve.

This article claims that 54% of energy used in the supply of UK electricity is wasted including less that 10% recovering energy from wasted heat.So whilst we may not have all that sunshine (other green energy production is available) maybe that waste should be eliminated with some going to battery store and other to Hydrogen production.

I have given both UK and Global examples of Hydrogen projects currently there is 70 Million tonnes of Hydrogen produced globally so it is not an unknown untried product. the key is how do we harness this gas for further green uses.

Governments are interested, R&D is interested, commercial organisations are interested and time will tell how this fuel will become more common place

 

[Gromett]

We may not have as much sunshine as some countries but we do have wind and wave power, so its not really an excuse to br behind the curve.

This article claims that 54% of energy used in the supply of UK electricity is wasted including less that 10% recovering energy from wasted heat.So whilst we may not have all that sunshine (other green energy production is available) maybe that waste should be eliminated with some going to battery store and other to Hydrogen production.

I have given both UK and Global examples of Hydrogen projects currently there is 70 Million tonnes of Hydrogen produced globally so it is not an unknown untried product. the key is how do we harness this gas for further green uses.

Sorry for laughing at your post... 70 Million tonnes of Hydrogen is produced globally you are correct, BUT all bar a very small percentage comes from steam reformation of fossil fuels. It is actually dirtier than using the natural gas directly...

The point about sunshine is that solar is the cheapest form of electric. Building a wind turbine to produce hydrogen is a very expensive way to produce hydrogen. Green Hydrogen for cars, vans, lorries and domestic heating would require the cheapest of the cheap electric otherwise you may as well just use direct electric heating.

Think about this. A wind turbine produces electric, with relatively little loss it is shipped across the distribution network to your house. You then turn on an electric heater which is pretty damn efficient (100%) at converting electrons to heat.

OR

You can use that electric to convert water to hydrogen, compress the hydrogen, pump the hydrogen across the country and then burn it in a boiler at a lot less than 100% efficiency (some of the heat goes out of the back of the boiler into the air via the flu).

OR

Optimally you can use 1KW of electric to run a heat pump which will give you 4KW of heat. And suplement this with resistive heating when required.

 

[Coolcats]

Sorry for laughing at your post... 70 Million tonnes of Hydrogen is produced globally you are correct, BUT all bar a very small percentage comes from steam reformation of fossil fuels. It is actually dirtier than using the natural gas directly...

The point about sunshine is that solar is the cheapest form of electric. Building a wind turbine to produce hydrogen is a very expensive way to produce hydrogen. Green Hydrogen for cars, vans, lorries and domestic heating would require the cheapest of the cheap electric otherwise you may as well just use direct electric heating.

Think about this. A wind turbine produces electric, with relatively little loss it is shipped across the distribution network to your house. You then turn on an electric heater which is pretty damn efficient (100%) at converting electrons to heat.

OR

You can use that electric to convert water to hydrogen, compress the hydrogen, pump the hydrogen across the country and then burn it in a boiler at a lot less than 100% efficiency (some of the heat goes out of the back of the boiler into the air via the flu).

OR

Optimally you can use 1KW of electric to run a heat pump which will give you 4KW of heat. And suplement this with resistive heating when required.

Well Grommet as the world changes from fossil fuels then Hydrogen will be created from more green energy as you can see from earlier posts for example wind turbines using their spare capacity.

As one famous quote goes:

It's the same each time with progress. First they ignore you, then they say you're mad, then dangerous, then there's a pause and then you can't find anyone who disagrees with you

 

[Coolcats]

Hmmm there may yet be hope for MoHo's
March 9th 2021 Ballard announces follow-on orders from Wright Bus (UK Company) for Fuel cell modules for 50 Bus's

 

[Gromett]

Car groups not interested in Hydrogen.

Car groups throw spanner in works of EU’s hydrogen drive

Industry pours cold water on idea hydrogen can vie with battery power to replace ICEs.

arstechnica.com

I know Coolcats will pick a small section of the article to "prove" his point but read the whole thing.

Confirms what I was saying about cars, vans and most trucking "in this country"

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Coolcats]

Car groups not interested in Hydrogen.

Car groups throw spanner in works of EU’s hydrogen drive

Industry pours cold water on idea hydrogen can vie with battery power to replace ICEs.

arstechnica.com

I know Coolcats will pick a small section of the article to "prove" his point but read the whole thing.

Confirms what I was saying about cars, vans and most trucking "in this country"

Given VW have invested so much into Battery tech it is not surprising they say this '“You won’t see any hydrogen usage in cars,” said Volkswagen chief executive Herbert Diess' and is a re-hash of what you posted before, never say never we should know this just as Musk pushed against ICE there will be a company or companies that pushes again this. I suspect we will see Hydrogen in heavy transport (just as we are seeing at the moment then migrate down to smaller vehicles

 

[Gromett]

Given VW have invested so much into Battery tech it is not surprising they say this '“You won’t see any hydrogen usage in cars,” said Volkswagen chief executive Herbert Diess' and is a re-hash of what you posted before, never say never we should know this just as Musk pushed against ICE there will be a company or companies that pushes again this. I suspect we will see Hydrogen in heavy transport (just as we are seeing at the moment then migrate down to smaller vehicles

You did read the Article didn't you? There was more than one person quoted in it.

You may also have missed the bit where it said he was an engineer working on hydrogen at BMW?

It is not Just VW that has dumped hydrogen to work on batteries. Most if not all the majors have spent billions on hydrogen over decades and have only in the last 5 years moved to batteries as they have become a proven tech thanks to Tesla.

 

[Coolcats]

You did read the Article didn't you? There was more than one person quoted in it.

You may also have missed the bit where it said he was an engineer working on hydrogen at BMW?

It is not Just VW that has dumped hydrogen to work on batteries. Most if not all the majors have spent billions on hydrogen over decades and have only in the last 5 years moved to batteries as they have become a proven tech thanks to Tesla.

Gromett as with all these magazine type articles, particular ones like this who re-hash quotes, you have to ask Who wrote the article, what interests do they have (commercial/financial) and what are they trying to influence (Conscious and unconscious bias) you may know that in Research papers interests should be declared not so with pop science magazines.

Within the article you are highlighting the negatives. However the article also states that Renault head of alternative fuels Philippe Prevel said that although hydrogen-powered passenger cars would not be a viable option until 2030 at the earliest, vehicles on fixed routes or closed networks could start to bring costs down before then. Which given the current state of the Hydrogen Market has a ring of reality to it. Tesla has been successful by chance in that Lithium batteries have only recently (in terms of the automotive industry) become available, along with micro electronics and the software to go with it. Tesla never had ICE manufacturing so the only choice was be successful or go bust, traditional car manufactures have whole organisations to change around tossing out traditional revenue streams, making people with 'old skills' redundant along with re-shaping and re-training the distribution and dealer networks, which is a monumental task and not for the faint hearted, and would only do this when they are sure of survival.

Hydrogen is here, different markets will use it differently it is a reality I have shown where Trains, Bus's and Taxi's are being deployed (early adopters), where and which countries are investing, how the Gas distribution networks are planning to change for the future how Boiler manufactures are manufacturing Natural gas - 100% Hydrogen powered boilers. Lemans LMP Hydrogen race car, the game is not over.

I'm a type of glass full type of guy and given what I have seen including JCB investment in Hydrogen I suspect we will see vehicles in the future powered by Hydrogen

 

[Gromett]

Gromett as with all these magazine type articles, particular ones like this who re-hash quotes, you have to ask Who wrote the article, what interests do they have (commercial/financial) and what are they trying to influence (Conscious and unconscious bias) you may know that in Research papers interests should be declared not so with pop science magazines.

Within the article you are highlighting the negatives. However the article also states that Renault head of alternative fuels Philippe Prevel said that although hydrogen-powered passenger cars would not be a viable option until 2030 at the earliest, vehicles on fixed routes or closed networks could start to bring costs down before then. Which given the current state of the Hydrogen Market has a ring of reality to it. Tesla has been successful by chance in that Lithium batteries have only recently (in terms of the automotive industry) become available, along with micro electronics and the software to go with it. Tesla never had ICE manufacturing so the only choice was be successful or go bust, traditional car manufactures have whole organisations to change around tossing out traditional revenue streams, making people with 'old skills' redundant along with re-shaping and re-training the distribution and dealer networks, which is a monumental task and not for the faint hearted, and would only do this when they are sure of survival.

Hydrogen is here, different markets will use it differently it is a reality I have shown where Trains, Bus's and Taxi's are being deployed (early adopters), where and which countries are investing, how the Gas distribution networks are planning to change for the future how Boiler manufactures are manufacturing Natural gas - 100% Hydrogen powered boilers. Lemans LMP Hydrogen race car, the game is not over.

I'm a type of glass full type of guy and given what I have seen including JCB investment in Hydrogen I suspect we will see vehicles in the future powered by Hydrogen

None of which is relevant to the point I made originally which you keep trying to get away from. Hydrogen will never be used in the UK for cars, vans or trucks.

I agree with the point about vehicles on fixed routes and closed networks. This is the only place where hydrogen can work even semi-economically on our roads..

 

[Coolcats]

Hydrogen will never be used in the UK for cars, vans or trucks.

Hydrogen-powered Toyota taxi fleet passes million-mile mark in London

How about UK early adopters here you can see Bus's cars Lorries and Vans?

I know its annoying but you cannot say Never......its predicted by 2050 50% of the worlds energy will come from Hydrogen the man says at the end of the Video.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Coolcats]

Oh and a Video showing how to refuel your Hydrogen vehicle

 

[Gromett]

Hydrogen-powered Toyota taxi fleet passes million-mile mark in London

How about UK early adopters here you can see Bus's cars Lorries and Vans?

I know its annoying but you cannot say Never......its predicted by 2050 50% of the worlds energy will come from Hydrogen the man says at the end of the Video.

Again you have given 2 examples of closed systems. Right after I said this.

I agree with the point about vehicles on fixed routes and closed networks. This is the only place where hydrogen can work even semi-economically on our roads..

Let me clarify.
For general usage cars in this country not on a fixed route or a closed network will never run on hydrogen. An example of this would be taxi's operating within a fixed zone.
Vans in this country, will never run on hydrogen because their won't be a country wide hydrogen network. The only exception is for vans used on a fixed route.
Lorries in this country will never run on hydrogen in this country except for those on a fixed route.

A council for instance operating within a fixed area may install their own hydrogen generating and filling station at the depot for vehicles that operate non stop. This makes sense as the downtime to charge a battery may not be practical.
A bus depot that operates fixed routes and longer distances may install their own hydrogen generating and filling station at the depot.
Long distance lorries for Distribution to Distribution centre work may use hydrogen and install hydrogen generating and filling stations at their main Distribution centres powered by onsite wind turbine or solar.

These will all be niche uses and do not advance the case for hydrogen for general use. There will never be a national network of hydrogen stations so no one outside of these niche use cases will buy a hydrogen car, van or Lorry.

For each of your examples of a single hydrogen truck, bus or van I can give you an example of 100's of bus, trucks or vans being ordered, delivered and in use.

 

[Coolcats]

Again you have given 2 examples of closed systems. Right after I said this.



Let me clarify.
For general usage cars in this country not on a fixed route or a closed network will never run on hydrogen. An example of this would be taxi's operating within a fixed zone.
Vans in this country, will never run on hydrogen because their won't be a country wide hydrogen network. The only exception is for vans used on a fixed route.
Lorries in this country will never run on hydrogen in this country except for those on a fixed route.

A council for instance operating within a fixed area may install their own hydrogen generating and filling station at the depot for vehicles that operate non stop. This makes sense as the downtime to charge a battery may not be practical.
A bus depot that operates fixed routes and longer distances may install their own hydrogen generating and filling station at the depot.
Long distance lorries for Distribution to Distribution centre work may use hydrogen and install hydrogen generating and filling stations at their main Distribution centres powered by onsite wind turbine or solar.

These will all be niche uses and do not advance the case for hydrogen for general use. There will never be a national network of hydrogen stations so no one outside of these niche use cases will buy a hydrogen car, van or Lorry.

For each of your examples of a single hydrogen truck, bus or van I can give you an example of 100's of bus, trucks or vans being ordered, delivered and in use.

Gromett this is a useful ping pong of posts, I have seen your views shift from the physics of Hydrogen means it will never happen, to it will only happen in countries with lots of sunshine and as mentioned in the latter fixed routes.

Now I am not saying I'm right and you are wrong or your wright and I am wrong it doesn't work like that. What I am saying is there is an interest in industry with Hydrogen, there are early adopters, and what if there is a national move away from natural gas to Hydrogen in the home supplied by local or national distribution? It may not happen tomorrow but 10-20-30 years it could well do.

The technology in vehicles is still early days, its robust enough for pilot trials and these trials are more then singular vehicles you scoffed at the 300 homes in Scotland but then again I am sure at one point there were only 300 homes with electricity.

My curiosity here is to see how market forces along with technology developments may or may not enable a Hydrogen future

This is one of the Governments web pages regarding Hydrogen

Hydrogen Supply Competition Phase 2 successful projects​

Over in the US there were competitions for vertical landing vehicles/Rockets these were post DC-X before Musk came along with space X it is reported that some of the DC-X engineers went on to work on space X but my point is competitions are a prelude and act as change agents

If you look at the Hydrogen Advisory Council they are looking to generate 5GW of clean hydrogen by 2030, I said before that all technology is politically shaped, when you look at who is on the council there are interests there that will want to be in on this as their current (petrochemical) revenues will start reducing big time.

So when you start producing all this Hydrogen what are you going to do with it? Heating, Trains planes and automobiles is my guess.

The future is going to include Hydrogen in the Mix it is going to be very interesting to see how this evolves, it is certainly not black and white......but maybe Hydrogen will be coming in some form to a MoHo near you sometime in the next decade (even if its just for cooking)

 

[Gromett]

I have seen your views shift from the physics of Hydrogen means it will never happen, to it will only happen in countries with lots of sunshine and as mentioned in the latter fixed routes.

No my position hasn't changed one jot. This was my first post on the subject. I am consistent on this point.

Hydrogen cars are nuts... They make no sense financially or from an infrastructure point of view. For ships, buses and large trucks I can see an argument could be made.

Oh and it seems a lot of people don't realise a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle still needs a battery and it is electric motors that power them from the fuel cell. So you basically have an EV which you then add a hydrogen tank and a fuel cell to.
Add this to the cost of the hydrogen filling station which cost Millions each compared to 100's of thousands for an EV charger.
Distributing hydrogen around the country is a safety issue.

And when you realise you need around double the electric to convert water to hydrogen than to just charge an EV....

We have been talking about no new diesel vans what is your plan. You notice I never mentioned physics in this post.

You then went off onto buses and other countries when we were specifically talking about motorhomes in this country initially. So as I have had to expand the scope of my responses to your off piste examples of course I have had to clarify my position.

Here it is again just in case you have missed it.

In THIS country, Green hydrogen will never be used by the general population for motorhomes, cars, vans or trucking. It may find uses in small self supplied/limited situations such as local council or businesses with specific needs. There will never be a national network of Hydrogen filling stations on the scale of current petrol stations. Therefore no hydrogen powered motorhomes.

Where green hydrogen will be useful in this country is in Steel production, Cement production, Ammonia production, long distance shipping (although ammonia seems a better solution) and energy storage.

 

[Coolcats]

No my position hasn't changed one jot. This was my first post on the subject. I am consistent on this point.




We have been talking about no new diesel vans what is your plan. You notice I never mentioned physics in this post.

You then went off onto buses and other countries when we were specifically talking about motorhomes in this country initially. So as I have had to expand the scope of my responses to your off piste examples of course I have had to clarify my position.

Here it is again just in case you have missed it.

In THIS country, Green hydrogen will never be used by the general population for motorhomes, cars, vans or trucking. It may find uses in small self supplied/limited situations such as local council or businesses with specific needs. There will never be a national network of Hydrogen filling stations on the scale of current petrol stations. Therefore no hydrogen powered motorhomes.

Where green hydrogen will be useful in this country is in Steel production, Cement production, Ammonia production, long distance shipping (although ammonia seems a better solution) and energy storage.

It would seem some smart rational organisations like Mercedes would never come up with a Hydrogen powered Campervan even if it was only a concept

Holiday on hydrogen with the Mercedes Concept Sprinter F-CELL camper van​

The Mercedes Concept Sprinter F-CELL camper van raises the interesting possibility of hydrogen fuelled holidays in the near future​

I do believe that the Renault Master is a base vehicle for a number of MoHo's​

Renault partners with Plug Power to develop hydrogen powered vans​

Renault is to launch zero-emission hybrid battery-hydrogen versions of its Kangoo light van and Master large vans.
Renault has revealed its first hydrogen vehicles, the Kangoo ZEHydrogen and Master ZE Hydrogen, making it the first manufacturer to bring hydrogen-powered vans to production.

Clearly there are manufactures interested in using Hydrogen in the Future its never going away but invest meant is needed for the infrastructure challenges to overcome but anything is possible.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}